Self-Deportation: Why Some Immigrants Are Giving Up on the American Dream

Following Donald Trump's re-election, a notable number of immigrants residing in the United States are making the difficult decision to leave, opting for what they term "voluntary departures" rather than navigating increasingly complex and uncertain legal pathways. 

This phenomenon, dubbed "self-deportation" by some policymakers, raises critical questions about its human cost and broader political implications. The decision to leave stems from a complex interplay of factors, including heightened fears regarding immigration enforcement, political polarisation, and perceived limitations in accessing legal residency. These decisions, while individually compelling, do not necessarily indicate a widespread trend, immigration scholars suggest, although they do reflect a growing sense of unease within immigrant communities.

High-Profile Departures Spotlight the Issue

Several high-profile cases highlight the concerns driving these departures. Diego de la Vega, the former deputy communications director to Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, relocated to Colombia with his wife in December, after living undocumented in New York for 23 years. Similarly, a decorated US Army veteran, who had been a permanent resident for nearly five decades, departed for South Korea following an enforcement action by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The story of Alfredo Linares, a chef from Mexico who had resided in California since arriving as a teenager, and his Canadian-born, naturalised US citizen wife, Raegan Klein, illustrates the personal and political dimensions of this trend. As concerns over immigration enforcement mounted, the couple chose to start anew in Mexico. Their decision, documented in a viral video, resonated widely, capturing the anxieties and frustrations of many immigrant families. Klein notes that the couple views their move as a means of reclaiming agency, preferring the term "voluntary departure" to "self-deportation."

"Self-Deportation" Under Scrutiny

The term "self-deportation" itself carries a contentious history. Originally coined in the early 1990s by satirists Lalo Alcaraz and Esteban Zul as a parody of anti-immigrant sentiment, it was later adopted by Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2012. Today, the expression has re-entered mainstream discourse, albeit with its satirical origins largely forgotten.

Dr Alexandra Filindra, professor of political science and psychology at the University of Illinois at Chicago, cautions against overemphasising the phenomenon of "self-deportation," suggesting it is less about actual migration patterns and more about political optics. Filindra argues that the Trump administration is employing a strategy of intimidation rather than widespread enforcement. 

"It's way too costly to identify, arrest, process and deport large numbers of immigrants," she observes. "There are so many court fights and so many organisations that are willing to support the rights of immigrants."

Data on Departures Remains Limited

Despite increased attention to the issue, comprehensive data on departures remains sparse. According to the Pew Research Centre, the balance between Mexican nationals entering and returning from the US was nearly at equilibrium between 2013 and 2018, with approximately 870,000 entering the US and 710,000 returning to Mexico. Filindra highlights that such back-and-forth migration has long been a characteristic of the American immigration landscape, often driven by economic or familial factors. 

She compares current patterns to those of European migrants in the 20th century, who frequently retired in their countries of origin after decades of work in the US.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is promoting its own version of self-deportation through the "Assisted Voluntary Return" (AVR) programme, in collaboration with the International Organisation for Migration (IOM). This scheme offers undocumented individuals a $1,000 stipend and travel assistance to leave the US voluntarily, with applications accessible through the CBPHome app.

However, implementation of the AVR programme appears limited. An anonymous source familiar with the initiative reports that while US authorities have referred approximately 1,000 individuals to IOM, only a small number have been repatriated through the AVR framework.

Legal Pathways Remain Challenging

Legal experts emphasise that navigating the path to legal residency remains fraught with challenges. For Linares and Klein, the conventional immigration route presented little hope. Despite being married to a citizen, Linares' undocumented entry complicated the process, potentially entailing years of bureaucratic uncertainty, significant financial costs, and the risk of detention during court proceedings.

ICE's increasing presence at immigration court buildings further exacerbates these challenges. Individuals seeking to regularise their status often find themselves subject to arrest just outside courthouses, deterring engagement with legal mechanisms and reinforcing fears within immigrant communities.

While the label "self-deportation" captures headlines, it obscures the nuanced realities behind these decisions. For many, the choice to leave is not surrender, but a strategic response to a system increasingly defined by fear, fragmentation, and unpredictability.